Dexterity, fixing Ranged vs Melee, fixing totems...etc Solutions. QARL & GGG PLZ READ

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

+4% Increased evasion per frenzy charge needs a change: You continue to have a poor understand of evasion entropy. However, I actually think your suggestion isn't a bad one; as I said in the last paragraph, the problem with evasion is stuns, and to a lesser effect status ailments. Pretty decent suggestion, despite the poor reasoning.

You spend too much theorizing about evasion entropy rather than actually using an evasive character in endgame maps. 50% will yield the same sequence as 51-53% because of entropy. That's easy to understand

"

Heavy Strike: I'm not worried about the desync so much as the anti-synergy: if you're melee, why push the monsters from you? Either they should remove the knockback like you suggest, or increase the melee range of Heavy Strike such that you're not continuously moving up on melee monsters when you're using it (unless you're attacking so fast they can't move back within close range in time).

The pushback is so that the monster can't hit you after you hit them. If you have the "Adds knockback to melee attacks" mod on a flask, and use a skill like frenzy + melee splash, your splash frenzy becomes very safe when the flask is active cause monsters can't retaliate after you attack due to knockback. The problem is heavy strike cause desync because of the knockback and is practically unusable when you need it most (map bosses/rares). Desyncing against them can spell trouble quick. People have complained about it in the Heavy Strike thread so GGG knows about it. They can atleast remove it's knockback effect for now and return it later.

I personally don't mind the knockback on it as a melee skill.

"

Making Dexterity a primary survival stat like INT/STR: Evasion is a survival stat; it might not let you take more hits, but it does let you take more attacks (by making some of them not hits). You, like so many others, are stuck in a fantasy world where the fact that you can evade half the attacks doesn't matter to you, you're just focused on one-shots when big hits are actually what evasion is good with (it's smaller hits and stunlock that's the real problem).

Evasion is a defensive stat, that is meant to be used by characters that want to make use of evasion. If you don't use evasion, then the evasion bonus is useless to you.

Lets you take more attacks? You mean like how armor lets you take more attacks as well? How is that unique to evasion?

If you can only take 2 hits with 30% evasion, you will still only be able to take 2 hits with 50% evasion. Stacking dex will not improve this. Stacking STR will improve this. INT will do the same if you use ES.

STR and INT are EVERYBODY'S PROBLEM. The improve PRIMARY SURVIVABILITY, which is what matters most. No amount of armor will save you if you dont have enough life. No amount of evasion will save you if you don't have enough life. DEX needs to become a primary survivability stat like INT and STR. INT/STR let you take more hits from elemental, chaos(es doesn't), and physical. DEX doesnt. Evading and taking more hits are not the same thing. You seem to think evasive characters never get hit. Less theory crafting and more mapping experience plz.

The new evasion cap this time around is 63% chance to evade in your mid 70s. This is with high rolls on your gear, takking almost every evasion node, and an evasive shield. At this point you'd be better of with less evasion and stacking more life/str nodes. The difference here is that armor % numbers can get much higher. Much higher with ease too.

You seem to think evasion characters are rolling around with 95% chance to evade, or that they are barely getting hit. Not even close. Most are sitting around 47-55% in their mid 70s-80s.

Me like many others? Where in my OP did I say evasion characters are getting 1 shot?

I'll tell you this, theory crafting aside and actual real experience, evasion characters do take burst dmg. Even with the whole crit rolling twice. You can and will still take burst dmg. Notice how every time you see people with evasive characters they always seem to have such a high block chance (be it with a shield or DW)? It's not coincidence.

If they remove that block chance they'll see something different in how combat feels. Their block chance is helping them out more than their evasion. Or they're attacking from a distance or spamming totems 24/7 and saying evasion works.

You theory craft too much. Jump into a map with a melee evasive character who doesn't have high block chance or is spamming totems 24/7. You'll see how much dmg you take on a consistent basis. Even with enfeeble, there are many moments where you'll be left dumbfounded at how much dmg you just took from a group of monsters.

You seem to think getting hit half the time is fine? See that pack of monkeys with the rare monkey that has "monsters attack faster" or "increased accuracy and crit chance" or "increased physical dmg"? Get hit half the time by them when taking 100% physical and see what happens.

It's always the same thing I keep seeing. "Evasion is working. I have 50% chance to evade, 46% dual wield/shield block, use endurance charges, have 2 granites of iron skin, spam totems consistently or attacking from a distance". You are using every single defense in the same, cept ES, and saying evasion is working. At that point you don't need evasion. It's simply there for the sake of saying you use evasion.

"

How to address the ranged vs melee disparity: OFFENSE: Couldn't disagree more. I have noticed a few instances of monsters taking damage and not moving; we do need to fix that, so that damaging any monster draws aggro instead of being safe. However, that doesn't mean we should turn this into a game where essentially every character is a melee character. Instead, the answer is in the damage effectiveness stat; simply put, a ring that adds 5-50 Lightning damage should add maybe 4-40 damage to an arrow attack, while adding perhaps 10-100 Lightning Damage to a melee skill. It's downright silly that off-weapon damage adds to many melee skills no more than it adds to ranged.

Do you play melee? (not being sarcastic. I'm asking a genuine question)

Melee doesn't need more dmg, melee needs more survivability

Why play melee when you can do the same with range but easier? The best defense is not getting hit, aka ranged.

This makes it where ranged characters have to be point blank, like melee, to get 100% dmg all the time. They also can never offscreen anything cause they deal no dmg to offscreen enemies.

Welcome to the life of all melee. Having to be close to deal dmg, cept a few melee skills.

"

How to address the ranged vs melee disparity: DEFENSE: Hate this idea. You know how it's frustrating to manage endurance charges with Enduring Cry? I don't want to see more mechanics that grant temporary defensive buffs, because I don't think buff juggling is fun.

What are you managing?

If you use melee skills, like a melee character would, then you get the buff. What is there to manage? Your gameplay doesn't change at all. This isn't a separate skill you press, like enduring cry, to get the buff. If you use melee skills then you get it by default.

So I ask again. What buffs are you juggling if you keep attacking with your cleave/flicker/dual strike/etc like you've been doing for the past couple months/years?

"

Making totems more risky, which in turn also addresses dual sporkers: This is a misguided suggestion, because totem offense isn't all that great. 40% less damage which you can't get around. 30% reduced attack/cast speed, which means you add Faster Casting and go from -30% to +19%, toss in some more speed from passives and gear to get to around +50%, it's really only 1/6 less damage so you end up doing 50% damage per totem, two totems to 100%, same as non-totem.

The problem is their tankiness; totems are too good at absorbing monster aggression on behalf of their casters. I've noticed myself that the life of Spell and Ranged Attack totems increases as they gain levels, and that by endgame they can tank more hits than they should. We should cut totem life by about 35%, and expand the Minion Life gem to be Minion and Totem Life, so that players can have totems with pre-nerf Life values if they're willing to commit to it (0.65*1.64=1.06, for 20q support). The totem life passives also need nerfing; 22% is a lot, 10% (as with minions) wouldn't be crazy, I'd go 15% since there's only two totem life nodes.

Less life on totems also means they kill themselves faster with reflected damage, another big incentive for using totems.

Totem offense isn't all that great?

Not only do they provide defense, you can clear rooms of enemies, and 3 rooms over without ever seeing what mobs were in them with ease.

Totems deal a lot of dmg, way too much.

Reducing their tankiness doesn't stop the totem fest that is the game. All it means is re-casting your totems a little earlier than before. Nothing changes. The spam fest will still continue.

That's fine, but there needs to be some risk. There needs to be a reason to say "I don't want to use totems". How much dmg they deal needs to be weighed on how much risk the cast puts himself in. Which is what I tried to address.

I have a genuine question for you, and I really would like to hear your answer:

Can you give me 1, and I only need 1, reason why you wouldn't want to spam totems (be it skellie/zombie/decoy) 24/7? What is the downside to not wanting to use totems? What makes someone say, "No I don't want to use totems"?

"

2-Handed Weapons: You don't parry with two-handed weapons, you parry by dual-wielding. Parrying is completely out-of-flavor for two-handers. I think the solution is to offer the old fan favorite of allowing two-handed weapons to be wielded in one hand, in keystone form, with an appropriately strong drawback to make up for the triple 6L; I'd go with "Cannot use non-Attack skills," which means no auras and no curses to fill all those extra sockets.

You can parry with dual wielding or 2 handed weapons. Dual wielding has enough bonuses as it and doesn't need anymore. Don't look at parry in the literal textbook dictionary definition sense, cause then you'd have to apply textbook definitions to everything in the game. Textbook definition wise, you won't be able to parry arrows while dualwielding. Heck you won't be able to parry 99% of the stuff the game throws at you with dual wielding, so lets not get literal as this is fantasy.

You shouldn't be forced to take a keystone, now matter how creative it is, to make 2H weapons attractive.

This parry applies to all 2 handed weapons, regardless of how you want to build your character. It gives them a unique property. "You want only offense, ok then. You'll get more it. You'll get to deal dmg to your enemies even when they hit you".

"

ozzy9832001 wrote:

I agree that totems either a) need to do less damage and/or b) have some other form of downside. I'd also throw auras and enfeeble into the mix as well. To me, both are required mechanics. Enfeeble should have the damage reduction removed -- and that reduction should just be folded into the monsters damage numbers by default (lower all monster damage), and then combine it with vulnerability.

Remove all the single element curses and just have elemental weakness. The problem is there are just too many redundancies.

No other curse is really ever used...always enfeeble, enfeeble.

Weapon differences I'll agree with. 2 handed weapons need some love...or dw needs to lose block. Parry would be a good mechanic, and should be applicable to all weapons, but higher % to big weapons or dw (perhaps, a parry on dw is only worth 25% dr, but 2 handed is 75%, since a 2 hander would parry better).

Yes totems do need a downside. People should not want to use totems.

I actually believe that enfeeble if one of the reasons why the defenses (ar/ev/es) don't go to higher numbers. The is a product of how the game is designed. Being open ended and allowing anyone to use anything creates a balancing problem. You have to account for everything that is possible. So when balancing mobs, they have to assume people are using enfeeble. To counteract this they overbuff monster dmg and make burst dmg more common so that monsters can be scary even when they are enfeebled. This ends up being a problem when someone decides not to use enfeeble as a curse.

Auras i'm indifferent to. I don't mind them personally.

Surprisingly, back then in closed beta, there was only 1 elemental curse, elemental weakness. It was too strong, and as such some of it's power was divided into 3 elemental curses.

I hate enfeeble too. It's become mandatory and I don't like mandatory things. Just like how block chance has almost become mandatory (everyone is holding a shield or heavily specced into DW block), or spamming totems, or attacking from a distance. I want diversity.

Yes 2Hs need some love. Right now I feel like I'm the only person building 2H builds. The only other ones I see are lightning strike and GS, but it's easy to make 2H weapons work with ranged skills.

"

Ozgwald wrote:

Maybe to make it more clear, but it is glancing blows + evasion. I don;t think this is in line with what GGG wants between an evasion/ dodge base mechanic and a mitigation system.

That said currently the game doesn't really cater all to well w.r.t. some if not most of the defensive mechanics present. So even though it is against the "design spirit" I could see it work for the game. It does needs some balancing because evasion + mitigation of attacks might be too much, especially if "fireball" is also taken into account.

I always feel like evasion needs reduced critical strike damage, to deal with large hits. Fact is however if you need it for armour builds and for evasion builds than perhaps the damage system/ monster difficulty is just off in the game... and I guess that is still true.

I reserve commenting on other topics for now...

Yes, thank you for atleast see where I'm coming from. The game's design doesn't really, as you said, cater to how the defenses were made.

Everyone is holding shield now or spamming enduring cry or spamming totmes or playing ranged. It's like they can't just build a character that isn't trying to stack every defense in the game to survive?

What happened to building ar/ev/es heavy characters without attacking from a distance or having block chance or having totems out 24/7 or having to use enfeeble at any little sign of danger?

This DEX survivability change I'm proposing will make people take less dmg, therefore improving their armor/es/ev.

Evasion characters still take burst dmg, and people seem to have this misconception that they don't because it rolls twice. That's why so many evasion characters are specced into block, so when that double crit roll fails it's checked against their block. If you don't have block the crit is going to really hurt.

People will tell you to "Use enfeeble", which once again goes back to what I was saying. Everyone using the same mandatory methods to survive. What happened to simply stacking ar/es/ev alone, without block/totems/mandatory enfeeble, to survive?

"

Flickerflare wrote:

Well first I want to thank you for taking the time to line out your concerns, with a solution to each of them, and a way to go about implementing them. But I also feel many of these would negatively impact gameplay for others, and in the end would make many of the things you want to make more accessible simply unusable. I'll respond to each of them in a similarly stated spoiler.

Thank you for taking your time to reply. It's always nice to hear different opinions.

"

Glancing Blows and why this implementation of them (or any implementation, actually!) is bad.
In the long term of how things work in this game, armor and evasion are equally as effective. 10000 evasion provides 50% evasion, and 30000 armor provides 50% protection (according to the sheet at least) Over a long, long period of time, evasion and armor will balance out to where each user has taken an equal amount of damage... but evasion actually has additional modifiers on how it handles damage that make it better than strength in a field test. Namely crit avoidance. Where if you assume a mob has a 5% crit chance, evasion will wind up taking approximately 6% less damage over a string of 10000 blows... Even more if elemental damage is concerned! While an armor character would be reducing 100 physical damage by 50%, and the evasion character would be reducing it by 50% a hit (by only taking every other hit)... if the target starts doing elemental damage of any sort.

100 physical, 100 elemental.
Armor char takes 50+50 physical, and 25+25 elemental (after resists)
150 damage taken.
Evasion char takes 0+100 physical, and 0+25 elemental.
125 damage taken.

When elemental is added to the mix, the evasion character instantly becomes superior.

That would be true if evasion and armor values both capped at 50%. Armor values scale to much higher values than evasion, and they get to those higher numbers much easier too. Then you also factor in endurance charges and granites of iron skin. You become almost immune to physical dmg from most mobs save rares/bosses. Which inherently is the problem.

"

The issue with evasion is that without HP bonus's, even with 95% dodge chance, the crit that finally gets through will kill you in one hit. Even if the possibility of being hit by that crit is 0.25%... it eventually will happen and kill you.

Your glancing blow formula would simply reduce the probability of being killed in one hit to 0.0125%... which means that the biggest perceived issue with evasion would not be resolved! On top of this, it would -heavily- weight defensive power into the hands of evasion, because a vast majority of the time you'd be reducing the damage you take by 95%. Even if you cut this value to a fifth of that, you'd be taking 20% less damage on the 1 in 20 blows that get through. This would just make evasion the new armor :P Especially if it applied to spells, or elemental damage on attacks.

It's even worse if a glancing blow is made garentee'd, because that's what armor does already! Since mathematically, evasion is already favorably better than armor, giving it even more advantages such as dramatically reducing the amount of damage the blows they do take do, would simply overpower the stat and make it too desirable.

I know where you're coming from though, I initially thought less of evasion than it was worth too! (http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/409374)

The glancing blows is not necessarily meant for 1 shot scenarios, but rather so that there is a chance for you to take less dmg overall. STR and INT help you take less dmg from all sources, DEX doesn't.

It's a pure rng chance, so it's not guaranteed. You'd still be susceptible to a lot of dmg as an evasive character, but atleast now there is a chance than you can take less.

It's meant to reduce how much dmg you take on a average basis.

Evasion is not mathematically better than armor. Armor values can scale way too high. The only time evasion can stand it's own is in 1 on 1 situations, which are too far and in between. You have to get to the boss first, and get rid of all his minions. Getting to the boss is where the problems can arise. Mobs can deal way too much dmg in this game. Taking 100% physical all the time can be hard to deal with in maps. 50% evasion won't save you either. You need to take less dmg. This is what the DEX change I'm proposing aims to do. Give evasive characters a chance to take less dmg when they would be hit. Currently DEX does not increase how many hits they can take, and this is a problem.

"

Changing the bonus granted by frenzy charges.
You're correct. This does NOTHING. And it's because it's got a stupid choice of wording. Want me to reword this for you? "Increases dexterity by 20 per frenzy charge." As we know. increased is added to other increased modifiers. So if you have 500 dexterity, and 100% increased evasion from the tree, than you already are at 300% base value. Going from 300% to 312% with 3 frenzy charges is... well? Worthless.

The only thing that needs to be changed is the skill needs to become a "more" modifier. So that 3 frenzy charges would instead take you to 336%. 7 charges is all the way up at 384%. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that this would mean the difference inbetween the buff being "from 59% to 60%" all the way to "from 59% to 66%", and that's actually a pretty big deal! You've went from "hit miss" on average to "hit miss miss". I honestly feel the same change should be made to the increased spell damage directly behind power charges.

I personally would like to be it be more geared towards stun/status ailment avoidance, but if they still want to stick to the evasion theme then yes you're idea is better. It needs to be more of a benefit.

"

Point Blank would make ranged classes BETTER than they currently are.
I ran a thread sometime ago about point blank.
http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/402424
In this thread I went over the mechanics of Point Blank, and found that in most combat situations point blank is only a damage boost. It would generally only make spells more effective than they already are, and frankly is a drastic boost to their power once the playerbase gets used to it.

The kind of point blank that I describe won't do this. They would need to be able to kiss monsters to get 100% of their dmg at all times. If they are attacking from a distance then the monsters take less dmg. If the mobs are offscreen then they take 0 dmg.

In other words, if this change were implemented and people tried to play the same way they do no with their ranged specs, they'll deal way less dmg than they're used to.

"

And defense.
This idea would be such an obscene buffer to a melee players stats, that I'm unsure of if it's actually a wise idea. I've got nothing solid to stand on there. It simply doesn't sit well with me. I'd much rather see defensive boosts giving directly to melee passives, both promoting offense and defense boosts for melee in the form of skill nodes a ranged class can't make use of. Especially because in those conditions melee wouldn't be constantly losing a large chunk of their EHP inbetween battles.

Giving melee passives defensive buffs is practically pigeonholing melee into those passives. People will cherry pick the combination of melee passives that give the best boost, in turn stifling diversity. At the same time all melee skills aren't equal. Cleaving from half a screen away is safer than frenzying upclose. That's why I said each melee skill will have it's own unique buff. So there is a risk vs reward system in place here as well.

"

You are overtaxing totems.
Hold. The Fuck. Up. 50%?! Totems would be unusable for anyone except ancestral bond (especially with the above change to defense proposed.). The last thing a melee user needs is to get one-shot because their totem was attacked, and it's the last thing a ranged user needs either. This would just immediately kill any totem user. Especially if sharing status ailments, because totems have lower life totals than the player to work with! Noone would touch the things again. ever. I can promise you that.

In blizzard games, turret skills (such as Turret for Demon Hunter, or Hydra for Wizard) simply stop attacking if the player gets more than 1 screen away. That's all that must be done here to help balance risk and reward.

lmao, i'm not gonna lie, I thought your "Hold. The Fuck. Up. 50%?" intro was pretty funny.

If you don't use totems, you pull all the aggro all the time and take 100% of the accompanying dmg. With totems you take 50%, which can be blocked/evaded/dodged/etc, and that 50% is checked against your armor/es. So in actuality you're taking less dmg that someone who has no totems. That's why I also included the "share ailments bit".

Getting more than 1 screen away won't change the totem spammage. It will still continue.

I'll ask you the same question I asked Scrotie:

Can you give me 1, and I only need 1, reason why you wouldn't want to spam totems (be it skellie/zombie/decoy) 24/7? What is the downside to not wanting to use totems? What makes someone say, "No I don't want to use totems"?


Dualstrike and Elemental Cleave.


It depends. Even if Cleave becomes less overall dmg, and Dual strike is nerfed, 2H weapons would still be in their predicament. They don't have anything unique to them to help with the direction the game has taken (moar and moar monster dmg). That's why everyone is holding a shield or dual wielding, especially dual wielding. You can get the same kill speed as a 2H with the added defense while dual wielding.

Nothing stands out when you think of 2H weapons.

"

I lost steam as I went along. I'm -seriously- ADD, so I find it difficult to pose long explanations to lots of things at once because of that. Sorry this took so long.

haha, no prob. I'm definitely in no rush ;)

"

PolarisOrbit wrote:

"

SoujiroSeta wrote:

• Making Dexterity a primary survival stat like INT/STR
• +4% Increased evasion per frenzy charge needs a change
• How to address the ranged vs melee disparity: OFFENSE
• How to address the ranged vs melee disparity: DEFENSE
• Making totems more risky, which in turn also addresses dual sporkers
• 2H weapons
• Heavy Strike

Putting point blank on everything sounds like you want to balance everything by removing their differences. It would work, but the wake of destruction in this crusade for balance would not be pretty. I don't like it.

haha, change has to come some time :)

"

Totems are a bit stronger than they probably should be, and while I don't like the solutions you posted, you may be close to something good. I think the way to do it may just be to distniguish between totems that expire by time and totems that die by damage. Totems that die by damage hurt the caster, let's say 25% of the caster's max life and 25% of the caster's max energy shield. This makes totems something to protect, instead of something to draw aggro. Maybe add a brief cooldown on totems if testing shows that players are too easily able to get around that drawback by mass summoning totems just before they die (another option would be to have totems cost percentage mana).

Thank you.

I agree with you on the bolded part. I want people to go, "Hmm, laying a totem out at this time would be dangerous. I'll do without them for now", rather than spam it continuously till what you're attacking is dead. If you feel some of your totem's pain and share their ailments, then you'd think twice about mindlessly spamming them 24/7. There will be a difference in someone who uses totems 24/7, and someone who doesn't.

"

2H weapons it sounds like you have undervalued the positive side, such as more socket links.

This would be true if you couldn't get 6S on your chest. That's why dual wielding is better. The 6S 2Hs provided is negated by a chest piece. Hence why Kaoms is better with a 2H weapon. It negates the chest piece, so you can only have 4L if you don't have a 2H.

If you could only get 6S on a 2H, then that would be a different case, but that's not how the game was designed.

"

Heavy Strike I agree was poorly designed. Who would ever want knockback on a single-target melee DPS skill in a game about taking on huge mobs? Nobody in the history of the universe! Why does this skill exist? I've thought about writing a post on this subject because POE has an endemic problem of introducing skills based on what the mechanics are capable of, instead of based on what players are going to be interested in. Heavy Strike is the biggest offender, but it's not the only one. The reason this issue seems topic-worthy is because the problem doesn't seem to be getting better with time. Recent addition like Searing Bond demonstrate little improvement in the skill design for this game. Everything else is getting a lot better with patches, updates, and time. Not skills.

The knockback doesn't bother me specifically, but I can see how it will bother others.

My personally pet peeve with it is the desync cause by it's knockback.

"

SoujiroSeta wrote:

Why play melee when you can do the same with range but easier? The best defense is not getting hit, aka ranged.

This makes it where ranged characters have to be point blank, like melee, to get 100% dmg all the time. They also can never offscreen anything cause they deal no dmg to offscreen enemies.

If you're going to advocate for Point Blank, please don't misrepresent it this way. Point Blank doesn't force you to close to melee range to do 100% damage, it grants you up to +50% more damage bonus for getting closer than mid-range. This gives sturdy ranged fighters an incentive to close in for the kill. It's a buff, not a penalty - that's why it's a Keystone!

Point Blank only reduces projectile damage when you shoot at long-range targets. It makes intuitive sense for human-powered projectiles to work this way and it balances out the defensive advantage of remaining outside the fray with a proportional reduction in damage. In addition, Point Blank gives ranged fighters protection against off-screen Reflect auras, one of the most insidious threats they currently face.

Point blank on all ranged attacks is a seriously bad idea. All you're doing is pulling everyone into desync and melee range, which forces everyone to spec the same way for defenses, and further homogenizes an already homogenized skill tree.

Also, spells by their very nature need to be spec'd differently than attacks. Spells can't miss, and GGG has compensated this by making their damage scaling notably worse than attacks. That means most spellcasters have to spend more points than attackers in getting additional crit nodes and crit multiplier rather than just slapping on resolute technique and focusing predominantly on survival. If you force spellcasters (particularly those that can't afford shavs for the insane RF boosts) to all get into melee range, then you're effectively overpenalizing the class and making everyone have a bad experience.

The evasion/frenzy charge buff has already been addressed. In the long rung, evasion and armor are both equally effective. Trying to dramatically change the effectiveness of frenzy charges and/or dex would make the stat overpowered. The reason why dex characters weren't as appreciated before was because the pure dex character (the ranger) had an absolutely awful starting tree. It's since been buffed and more players are figuring out ways to exploit some of the absolutely insane nodes there. And you can bet there will be more evasion/dex-based characters because of it.

The totem buff is way overboard. You're essentially destroying all viability of totems simply because of one very powerful totem spec. Which other totem spec is near as strong as dual spork? You can make other totem builds good, but you can make their self-cast versions just as good. The main reason why people are willing to build totem specs is for metagame reasons (magic find) and/or to avoid one of the most damaging mechanics in this game (reflect). Both of these issues are problems in and of itself and do not really relate to the totem issue.

A lot of this thread reeks of "Why does your spec have nice things that mine can't? Nerf them all" jealousy, honestly.

"

SoujiroSeta wrote:

People should not want to use totems.

"

SoujiroSeta wrote:

Do you play melee? (not being sarcastic. I'm asking a genuine question)

Melee doesn't need more dmg, melee needs more survivability

The easier you get the damage, the more resources you have to focus on the survivability. Increasing melee damage is the most elegant method for increasing melee survivability; it just works in an indirect way.

Yes dexterity is really bad and now since its useless for iron reflex(this nerf was really bad They Should nerf iron reflex for all ppl or do nothing not nerf almost only for Main dex class) its a joke how its bad compared to Str/int

For most of ranger wich is the Main dext class the dext is 100% useless because almost all ranger High lvl use lioneyes glare and iron reflex.

So much wrong with this thread, I feel bad for wasting Qarl's time if he read it.

ON a sidenote, not going to bother going over in depth what you have done wrong here. Once more you has assumed evasion is bad. You have also misunderstood how other things work. You compared the frenzy charge buff with the end/power charge, not noticing that the power charge buff is useless, and builds which use powercharges on spells don't even bother grabbing it its so weak, unless they want to go through it to the passive above.

But mostly, my point has been more elegantly put by other people. Your grasp of evasion is lacking, it is stronger than armour in a large number of cases. Dex itself is weak, but its not the evasion stat that is weak, but the accuracy. Saying that accuracy is useless because of Rt is like saying health is useless caus of CI, so why have health on str. Or mana useless on int because of Bm.

So much wrong here